> So will Obama, a person of color, dismantle the regional commands of  the
> so-called "Defense" Department? Will he suddenly reverse himself and  not
> support Israel, even though he was sympathetic to the recent  U.S.-Israeli
> attack on the Palestinians? Will Obama withdraw troops from  Afghanistan or
> from Germany or Japan or Colombia or Indonesia? Will  Obama stop   
supporting the corporate exploitation of Central  America?
 
Comment 
 
I believe we are in for some policy shifts. 
Not because Obama is black. 
 
If anything the president is black because of policy shift. 
 
Obama is extremely astute and saw the possibility of winning President when  
no one on the left or right thought it possible two years ago, save a very few 
 within his campaign. Obama is the most unflinching and coolest “muther***ker”
 I  have every seen in my life. 
 
Within this unflinching cool is danger and opportunity. 
 
By policy shift is meant reforming the political relations between states,  
while leaving the primary social relations of capital intact. Capital cannot be 
 reformed but political relations are always subject to shifts and political  
will. On the other hand a political law cannot overturn an economic law, that 
 has not run the course of its own logic. Stalin himself could not overturn 
the  law of value. Lenin did not even try. Yet policy shift is related to 
shifts in  the daily operations of capital. 
 
Everyone has been trying to make heads or tails of "globalizations" and the  
reemergence what seems to be economic and political blocks, not seen 15 years  
ago. 
 
One of the indicators of policy shift is the maelstrom of protest created  
when Obama suggested sitting down with political leaders of Iran. This was a  
signal quickly withdrawn and then put forward again. This signal will continue  
to resurface no matter who leads the state department. The suggestion of 
sitting  down with leaders of North Korea and Cuba, without prior conditions 
was 
also  withdrawn from political view, but Obama understood what he had stated. 
 
What is somewhat interesting is the signals being sent from Cuba on the  
basis of its internal policy shifts. In the case of North Korea the  
gravitational 
pull, economic, political and historic is towards China and for  
reunification, which involves anti-China and pro-china forces, both pushing for 
 
reunification for different reasons. As the saying goes, America has skin in 
the  game. 
 
I believe we should be prepared for a series of policy shifts over the next  
twenty years or so. As cool and unflinchingly sober and calculating Obama is, 
if  he desired it, he could not simply dismantle regional commands of the 
Defense  department. Politics do not operate on the basis of individual will. I 
do 
not  suggest this is his desire. I do suggest one trying to change the agenda 
at a  union meeting or at their local bingo club and experience the movement 
of real  world politics and human subjective will.  
 
No one individual can dismantle such large military institutions without  
support from within the military and throughout the governing political  
institutions and bureaucracy. The immediate response to such an attempt would 
be  an 
untimely death or a political/military coup. This is not to suggest  supporting 
Obama or his administration. It is to say there is a level of  politics 
immune to ideological declaration. 
 
In the case of Germany and Japan, US troops will be removed, in all  
probability, or as a plausible political scenario, when these peoples and their 
 
government demand it. It seems to me that there is a tendency to assign to the  
individual, a responsibility impossible for the individual - any individual, to 
 
carry out. For instance, President John Smith, a non-colored person could not  
dismantle a department of the defense department simply because he desired it 
or  rather, because someone else desired it. 
 
America has a rather large Arab population, the largest outside the Middle  
East. I recall when Saddamn was welcomed into America, with celebrations and a  
recreational center was built in Dearborn bearing his name. Bush W. shifted  
policy. Shift happens and shift hit’s the fan. Then there was the questioning 
of  Obama policy towards the war the state of Georgia launched, and the Russia 
state  responded to. I recall Obama saying something that indicated a 
political shift,  although I cannot recall what it was at the moment. 
 
When Bush W. was elected in 2004, there was a discussion of how much he  
would cut the federal deficit and budget. I wrote on the side that he would  
expand both, not because I have some unknown information, but because he could  
not 
rule without feeding the machine. 
 
Here is what scares the crap out of me about Obama on day two of his  
presidency. Obama spoke or said something about “doing something” to  so-called 
entitlements like social security. He stated that everyone has to have  some 
skin 
in the game of making America right. Tampering with Social Security  other 
than expanding it and perhaps giving portions of these programs their own  
department, like Medicare, is political suicide. He will not last in office 6  
months “messing wit” social security. 
 
I also detected a possibility of policy shift in terms of Afghanistan. When  
the talking heads of broadcast start questioning why we are there, policy 
shift  is being discussed.  
 
If today is used as a beginning point and we drawn a line between now and  
the overthrow of the power of capital, we might need to think about a long  
series of conflicts and shifts. At least that is what I have told myself for 
the  
last 40 years. 
 
 
WL. 
**************From Wall Street to Main Street and everywhere in between, stay 
up-to-date with the latest news. (http://aol.com?ncid=emlcntaolcom00000023)
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

Reply via email to